WABC AND WOR RATINGS AT AN ALL-TIME LOW

[FredLeonard]

But it wasn't "unique" programming. It was the exact same programming available on AM. Just with better fidelity.

Wrong! Oldies (all oldies, all the time). Progressive Rock (aka Underground Rock). Jazz. Classical. AM was Top 40, MOR, Full Service, Country, Ethnic/Foreign Language, Religion or R&B. Occasionally some blocks of other genres late at night or on weekends but they were not widely available.

Classical and jazz weren't formats that attracted the biggest numbers to FM. Progressive Rock was not a big audience attraction, and was gone by the mid-70s. The most popular FM stations were simply duplicates of the AM Top 40 stations. And in NYC, you had three FM Beautiful Music stations in the Top 10. That wasn't unique programming...it was the same exact programming those stations had done in the 60s before FM became popular. Oldies wasn't unique. These stations took songs that had been hits on AM and played them on FM. The real attraction was the sound quality. I mean WBAI was definitely unique programming, but I don't know anyone who bought an FM converter to listen to Bob Fass or Steve Post.

Classical attracted an elite audience that some advertisers coveted. For some marketers quality trumps quantity. To a lesser extent, so did Jazz.
Progressive Rock morphed into AOR or AAA.
Top 40 stations played maybe one Oldie an hour.
These formats were not available on AM and offered listeners additional content choices.

Stop quibbling over semantics.
Sound quality was a factor but FM's better sound quality had been there since the 40s. FM didn't take off until it offered programming which AM did not - "unique" or otherwise.

 

[davideduardo]

Once again, TheBigA has shifted the focus of his reply away from the point of my post which was about the cost of early FM adoption in cars

But the key to FM success was greater format diversity and lower commercial loads.

In-car capabilities, as with most Detroit decisions, followed market demand. Once FM became a positive sales factor, AM FM radios became an option, and, later, standard equipment. But since in-car listening was less than 30% of all listening back then (per the relative upstart, Arbitron), in-car was not the make-or-break factor in the growth to dominance of the "new" band. And Pulse and Hooper, if anything, undermeasured in-car listening... so the key, initially, was in-home listening.

 

[wadio]

In-car capabilities, as with most Detroit decisions, followed market demand.

And wasn't "market demand" a result of unique, compelling programming?

But the key to FM success was greater format diversity and lower commercial loads.

Again, unique and compelling programming. Greater diversity and lower commercial loads were unique to FM at the time. So why the "but?"

 

[davideduardo]

And wasn't "market demand" a result of unique, compelling programming?

If you call "fewer commercials" with better audio and in stereo "unique programming" I will go along.

In most cases, the dominant FM formats were adaptations of AM formats. Big A has been pointing this out already.

Beautiful Music was first an AM format... "Kabl(e) music over San Francisco" being an example.

FM Top 40, which exploded in the 1972-1973 period, was AM Top 40 with half the commercials.

Even progressive rock was an offshoot of the division of Top 40 into hard rock, pop, chicken rock and oldies. Chicken rock would become AC, and hard rock would morph into AOR; not original formats... just derivatives.

But the key to FM success was greater format diversity and lower commercial loads.

Again, unique and compelling programming. Greater diversity and lower commercial loads were unique to FM at the time. So why the "but?"

But... the diversity was simply a function of having more available stations with format variants. Not new formats, just fragmentation or duplication of existing ones with more tolerable commercial loads and...

... almost as important as fewer commercials... much less news, talk and public affairs programming. That's not innovative formats... that's elimination of negatives.

 

[wadio]

Yes, I'd call fewer commercials in a familiar format "unique programming." It's a major reason why people pay for Satellite radio.

I don't know the history of Beautiful Music in NY but, during the late '60s, early '70s, Beautiful Music and Alternative Rock were unique to the FM band here. If you wanted to hear the unique programming of WNEW-FM, you needed an FM radio. Whether it or something similar existed elsewhere in the past or might move somewhere different in the future was irrelevant. It was unique in the moment.

But of course, all of this misses the point of this thread and the question, "If WABC and WOR suddenly switched from AM to FM, would their ratings remain at an all time low?"

 

[TheBigA]

If you call "fewer commercials" with better audio and in stereo "unique programming" I will go along.

They only did fewer commercials because they didn't have metrics. Once the audience kicked in, commercial loads were no different from AM. Listen to airchecks of 99X from 1978 and count the spotload. Same with WBLS. Even WNEW-FM and WPLJ had pretty high spotloads by the late 70s. The difference was they grouped songs together (segues) and then did multiple spot clusters.

I don't know the history of Beautiful Music in NY but, during the late '60s, early '70s, Beautiful Music and Alternative Rock were unique to the FM band here.

Both WVNJ and WPAT signed on in 1961 with Beautiful Music. WRFM came later in 1968. Prior to 1968, WRFM was classical. But if beautiful music was "unique" then FM should have caught on ten years earlier than it did.

 

[TheBigA]

But of course, all of this misses the point of this thread and the question, "If WABC and WOR suddenly switched from AM to FM, would their ratings remain at an all time low?"

Cumulus has already tried this in several markets, like DC where they simulcast conservative talk on WMAL-AM on the FM, and it's been a failure.

 

[TheBigA]

Stop quibbling over semantics.
Sound quality was a factor but FM's better sound quality had been there since the 40s. FM didn't take off until it offered programming which AM did not - "unique" or otherwise.

Once again, FM was not available in cars or in portables until after the patent ran out in 1966. People couldn't sample the better quality because it wasn't on most devices. It's very similar to satellite. They have 100 channels of music, but the unique programming doesn't matter because MOST people don't want to pay for the subscription, and they don't want to buy the receivers.

 

[KeithE4]

Once again, FM was not available in cars or in portables until after the patent ran out in 1966. People couldn't sample the better quality because it wasn't on most devices. It's very similar to satellite. They have 100 channels of music, but the unique programming doesn't matter because MOST people don't want to pay for the subscription, and they don't want to buy the receivers.

No portable FM radios before 1966? Tell that to Heathkit, who offered one in 1963.

Here's a photo of an AM/FM radio from a 1964 Ford Galaxie.

 

[davideduardo]

Stop quibbling over semantics.
Sound quality was a factor but FM's better sound quality had been there since the 40s. FM didn't take off until it offered programming which AM did not - "unique" or otherwise.

Once again, FM was not available in cars or in portables until after the patent ran out in 1966. People couldn't sample the better quality because it wasn't on most devices. It's very similar to satellite. They have 100 channels of music, but the unique programming doesn't matter because MOST people don't want to pay for the subscription, and they don't want to buy the receivers.

I had an FM portable... a Zenith... in 1960. At WCUY in Cleveland, in the 1960-1962 period we gave away AM-FM pocket radios (well, they fit in a biiiiig pocket) via some kind of trade. We had rooms filled with them.

There were plenty of European FM car radios. I had one, bought at a Cleveland after market audio place in '62. Europe developed FM better and earlier than the US in a number of places, with Spain having a nation a FM Top 40 network covering nearly 100% of the country... all by 1966. And before that, the state broadcasters used FM effectively... so there were lots of radios available from phillips, Gerundig, Telefunken, Blaupunkt, etc.

 

[KeithE4]

Once again, FM was not available in cars or in portables until after the patent ran out in 1966. People couldn't sample the better quality because it wasn't on most devices. It's very similar to satellite. They have 100 channels of music, but the unique programming doesn't matter because MOST people don't want to pay for the subscription, and they don't want to buy the receivers.

No portable FM radios before 1966? Tell that to Heathkit, who offered one in 1963.

Here's a photo of an AM/FM radio from a 1964 Ford Galaxie.

Also, my folks purchased a Sears AM/FM/SW portable in 1964. Listening to it was how I first discovered ham radio.

 

[TheBigA]

No portable FM radios before 1966? Tell that to Heathkit, who offered one in 1963.

Not to the extent that they became available after 1966. Prior to that, they were very limited, in the same way HD radio is now.

Give me some sales figures from the period. Not just that companies made them. I want to know how many people BOUGHT them.

 

[wadio]

But of course, all of this misses the point of this thread and the question, "If WABC and WOR suddenly switched from AM to FM, would their ratings remain at an all time low?"

Cumulus has already tried this in several markets, like DC where they simulcast conservative talk on WMAL-AM on the FM, and it's been a failure.

And if even a simulcast can't succeed, what do we conclude? It's the programming! Blame the message, not the messenger.

 

[KeithE4]

No portable FM radios before 1966? Tell that to Heathkit, who offered one in 1963.

Not to the extent that they became available after 1966. Prior to that, they were very limited, in the same way HD radio is now.

Give me some sales figures from the period. Not just that companies made them. I want to know how many people BOUGHT them.

Most people didn't buy them because there was little that the general public (i.e. people who were not classical, jazz, or Mantovani fans) were interested in. Also, many parts of the country could only receive one or two FM stations in 1966, and in many cases, they just simulcasted their sister-AM. That is, if FM was available at all. Many parts of the country didn't have FM. So there was little need for most people to buy an FM radio until the late '60s.

AM/FM radios weren't included as standard equipment in most cars until the '70s.

 

[FredLeonard]

AM/FM radios weren't included as standard equipment in most cars until the '70s.

The late 70s.

 

[benale]

Returning to the original thread...WOR is at a 1.1..I really thought with the addition of some local programming..Mark Simone,Rita Cosby and John and Ken(even though the first hour is a simulcast of their last hour on KFI), the station's ratings would improve..I do enjoy Simone's show, but apparently, nobody is listening. WABC has little over twice WOR's share and their programming is wall to wall syndication.

I wonder how Simone and Geraldo do against each other?

 

[wadio]

To be fair, it's a bit too early to judge the impact of WOR's programming changes. Talk talks time to build an audience. But, as I've mentioned before, WOR's programming is so inconsistent that I can't see how the station as a whole has a chance of attracting a loyal news/talk audience.

Think about it -- John & Ken are the very popular afternoon-drive hosts on KFI, while here in NY we're "treated" to Rita Cosby. What a joke! If KFI replaced J&K with Rita Cosby tomorrow I guarantee you the radiodiscussion.com LA board would be on fire with outrage and KFI's ratings would drop over time.

John & Ken, as good as they are, can't save WOR with just two hours in the late evening. They can't neutralize the harm done by Rita Cosby, Dave Ramsey, and the adolescent-Rush-clone Andy Dean.

Benale, like you I was hoping for good things from WOR but as far as I can see it's only getting worse.

 

[davideduardo]

AM/FM radios weren't included as standard equipment in most cars until the '70s.

The late 70s.

Yet by 1977, without FM being standard on most cars, the FM band passed 50% of all listening.

 

[TheBigA]

Yet by 1977, without FM being standard on most cars, the FM band passed 50% of all listening.

I think that's one of those statistics driven by major markets where FM was more established.

 

[davideduardo]

Yet by 1977, without FM being standard on most cars, the FM band passed 50% of all listening.

I think that's one of those statistics driven by major markets where FM was more established.

If you look at Duncan's American Radio for that year, you can see that market size did not have much to do with it at that point.

Some majors like SF had relatively low FM shares, while others had much more than 50% of listening on FM.

Here is a link to the Spring '77 Duncan book.

http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Duncan-American-Radio/Duncan-1977-Spring.pdf